all for tank commander ...

– Putting 4K textures in WoT is too resource-expensive for now; – It’s not yet decided whether such textures will come in the future; – Visual weather will not be implemented: “Why introduce it, so that people with weak PC’s disable it because it lowers their FPS and good players disable it because it interferes with their gameplay?” – Really many people have special effects in sniper mode disabled; – Currently WG is developing a variant of complete crew and perk overhaul so that the current issues would disappear (useless perks, missing crew members when switching to another tank – or “radiomen in then barracks” issue, zero alternatives when selecting which perks you want first).The main idea is “one crew as an entity without each crewmember having different perks” – not like in WoWs but something around that idea.

– It was never MM’s goal to make mirror teams; – Some players are proposing a rollback to classic versions of Malinovka, Murovanka etc. – Storm: “So you want to return the great camping game “who camps more in the bushes”?” – It’s possible to introduce vehicle component physics (for example shaking antennae, fuel tanks falling off) even without Havok; – The tank control feature where if you stop pressing “W” the tank immediately stops was made intentionally to make the tank control easier;

– There are developers who completed the individual missions (people with 70 percent winrate and higher), according the Storm they did not abuse the developer function of being able to select which map they want to play in random battles; – High end PC’s have “more than sufficient” performance in WoT, “nobody needs 100+ FPS”; – Q: “I need 100+ FPS!” A: “Yeah? And what famous cybersports team are you playing in? What prizes have you won?” (he later adds that in WoT, there’s no noticable difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS, FPS stability and conversion of excessive FPS to image quality are more important); – There is no FPS guarantee in WoT, all that depends on PC configuration; – The Chieftain situation is complicated according to Storm. The vehicle that is standing in Bovington is called Mk.2 by the Bovvy workers. Wargaming made a 3D scan of that vehicle. When the scan was already done, they found out that it’s not a Mk.2 but a Mk.6. The armor model was taken from the Bovvy Chieftain as well (RG: two things – first, the 120mm frontal armor Chieftain is a myth, spread by wrong sources, second – not all armor parts could be measured, a part of the Chieftain armor model is pure guesswork); – Storm confirms: Chieftain will keep its 750hp engine and 55 ton weight. It will have really thin hull but a really, really good gun. – There were no other tier 10 British HT candidates than the Chieftain (a player was promoting Listy’s “Super Conqueror” with improved armor, this was not considered: “Unfortunately, there’s not a single word about armor, only the words of this guy (Listy) without any proof unless I am misreading it”) – Storm later learns that it was Listy who measured the Chieftain and Conqueror for Wargaming and backs off a bit, it’s possible the “Super Conqueror” will go somewhere else instead; – The only reason FV215b is getting replaced is the fact it’s made up, otherwise statistically it’s okay; – WG will not implement existing mods officially: “the problem is in bugs and performance loss”: “some modpacks on certain PC’s eat up 50-60 percent of performance and certain popular modpacks increase number of crashes by an order of magnitude”. The fact your PC doesn’t suffer from FPS drops caused by mods doesn’t mean other PC’s don’t have that. Modmakers are also not bound by any rules, they can make whatever mods they want without considering bugs of performance issues while Wargaming cannot implement some functions due to serious FPS losses on some PCs. An example would be the XVM minimap that makes some PCs lose a lot of FPS. – Many functions previously implemented by mods were already implemented into the game officially, this process will continue; – Flash game UI will not be reworked to another platform; – Multi-turret mechanism: “For a few vehicles only, why do you need that?” – Hydraulic suspension: “For two vehicles, why do you need that?” – AA vehicles: “There are no planes in AW, why do you need that?” – Wheeled vehicles: “Those would go to tier 5-6 max, why do you need that?” (RG: This is not true. Wargaming made about a year ago a full branch proposal for French wheeled vehicles and armored cars); – Storm later adds that the vehicle types listed above would be played only a few players; – Wargaming is developing “many features that will introduce diverse gameplay”; – It is not technically possible to make the client play the replays of old versions; – French tier 5-7 guns do have different damage for AP and APCR rounds, this is a bug and will be fixed; – More rewards for top 3 players of losing team are not planned since the losing team could consist entirely of players who played really bad and WG does not want to reward crap gameplay; – Storm is not the WoT project leader (RG: he’s the chief developer); – The map distribution changes were made for the newbies to learn to play easier. It was not possible to let experienced players to play on more maps on lower tiers because this produced long waiting queues. – There will be an improved tutorial in the future; – Wot-news vehicle statistics are NOT a proof of anything when it comes to WG; – Practically nobody is playing tier 2 premium tanks; – Current online numbers in WoT are higher than those last year during the same time; – Chat 2.0 core was already programmed – interface, not so much (only partially); – There are no immediate plans for new winter and desert maps; – The current 9.10 map distribution is final but there will be a patch with some changes, the 9.10 patch is already compiled; – Developers are still considering “solving” teamkilling by removing the possibility to do damage to allies.